Friday, June 10, 2011

mark zuckerberg parents

images mark zuckerberg parents. mark zuckerberg facebook

Mark Zuckerberg has laid

cinqsit

02-02 08:43 PM

If i am understanding you right.....your labor is applied for EB2 qualification but I-140 is applied and approved in EB3. And you want to reapply a new I-140 for EB2 by using the same labor. I believe, you should be able to apply.

Labor certification is not expired as another poster mentioned. It will expire in 180 days only if no I-140 is applied using that labor.

Consult a good attorney and it will be worthwhile instead of waiting for backlogged EB3.

Yes you should be able to apply a I-140 for new reclassification (basically a new I-140)

Make sure there are no conflicting alternative/secondary requirements like "BS and less than 5 years of experience" in your approved labor.

They will check for ability to pay and other checks the they do at 1140 stage again.

Good luck

cinqsit

wallpaper Mark Zuckerberg has laid

mark-zuckerberg-ceo 123123

sertasheep

05-24 01:52 PM

Great job, Salil. Can you share your experience working with the press? Was it easy getting the newspaper to carry this article, or did you have to pursue this for a long time? The reason I am asking this is, its hard for one to determine what the media will print. They may take one quote from you but might use it in a different context. I came very close to quoting on Seattle Times but stayed put as the reporter wanted my opinion on the "other" current debate that's going on, and she was not willing to carry an article on Legal immigration alone.

mark zuckerberg parents. mark zuckerberg wife. Eidorian

gc_dream07

02-01 01:22 PM

If you have enough money, invest 1million in US, and get GC, and buy peace of mind.

2011 mark-zuckerberg-ceo 123123

mark zuckerberg parents. mark zuckerberg; mark zuckerberg. firewood

fromnaija

04-21 12:40 PM

Hello fromnaija, I don't think we need to start out GC process everytime we move to a different location. I believe that GC is for future employment so according to me we don't need to re-start GC process when we move from east to west and north to south.

Thanks

Yes, if you are sure of moving back to the job location specified in the Labor Certification you may not have to restart the process. If you know you will not move back, youand your employer will be commiting immigration fraud if a new LC is not applied.

Remember, this is in the context of someone who has not filed I-485. If it has been six months or more since applying AOS, then yes you may move without having to restart the GC process.

To the OP, there is nothing that says you cannot have multiple LC from same employer for different location. As I said before if the different locations are within the same Metropolitan Area, then one LC suffices.

Great work IV core team! EB immigration will be benefited by the work done by IV core team sooner or later. Keep it up!!

One will wonder that Indian Government will do something as the India and her economy are benefited by EB immigration big time in last decade. In the global economy the overseas workers are the greatest strength India has and as usual they are completely ignoring the problems faced by EB immigrants in the USA.

Just a thought,

Involving India or any other foreign Government is not a good idea. It can result to severe backlash.

2010 mark zuckerberg parents. mark zuckerberg wife. Eidorian

mark zuckerberg parents. mark zuckerberg facebook

waitin_toolong

07-27 10:07 AM

it is ok for the derivative applicant to not be working, but if the primary who os geeting the GC on the basis of employment does need to be employed at the time of approval.

1-2 months off will not matter. If the I-485 stays pending for too long they can raise RFE for current employer letters and other specifics, you will need to have a job lined up at that time.

Sorry if you find it offensive, but I dont think its going to prove anything to the USCIS and I am not even sure they will notice it. Why is no one talking about a public demonstartion in New York or something along those lines that is bound to get TV reporters attention and having a spokesperson who can speak on our behalf in front of a national audience and talk about the discrimintaion that US shows against legal workers If Illegal Immigrants have the courage to pursue their agenda on the streets what is stopping us from doing it. What are we afraid of? its not the lack of issues, its the lack of resolve Lets see if thread swells to dewcent levels we can organize a protest against USCIS infront of NBC studios

Please read, sign and observe

http://www.petitiononline.com/aos485/petition.html

To: U,S. Congress American Government

USCIS/DOS has made fun of a set of highly skilled immigrant workers of America. They issued a bulletin in June 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html) declaring all classes of employment-based visa priority dates current from July 1, 2007 and then pulled the carpet under everyone's feet by issuing a bulletin in July 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) which declared all July applications ineligible.

The June bulletin caused a frenzy of activity amongst the applicants which ranged from applicants cancelling their travel plans and rushing to file their petitions to applicants tying the nuptial knot and cancelling their plans of higher studies. This act is mockery and disrespect of such skilled workers, causing them huge emotional and mental trauma. It also represents a huge economic loss in terms of time and resources consumed for readiness in filing the applications that involved the individuals, their employers and the attorneys representing them.

As a mark of protest we would like to observe July 13, 2007 as "NO WORK DAY". We demand justice from America and the American Governement. We believe our voices will only be heard when our presence (and importance) is made conspicuous by our absence. So, all those who believe in this are urged to refrain from going to work on Friday July 13, 2007.

This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:

1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application; 2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application; 3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status; 4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings; 5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.

The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:

1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel; 2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;

The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:

1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status; 2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members; 3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits; 4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.

A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:

1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law; 2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.

tattoo mark zuckerberg parents. Mark Zuckerberg named TIME

mark zuckerberg parents. mark zuckerberg; mark zuckerberg. MacManDan

njdude26

08-26 11:16 AM

Im planning to get an online MBA from phoenix univ or someother univ. Do you guys think it is helpful in getting a GC in case the SKIL bill is passed some day !

That means let Immigrants suffer in hell. with this ignorant guy's letters, and inturn USCIS responds and issues a dump memo on that letter again, and the suffering becomes more and more day by day. Is the republicans have majority or Democrats I have doubts about that. This bipartisan is a key word to do nothing and enjoy all the benefits of being the ruling side. There is no seniority issue here. These senators are weeds who make immigrants life miserable.

Like Ron hira mentioned, try to take a look from politics and 'election' perspective.whether he wins or loses, always tries to be in the news. just ignore. earlier we have this kind of nonsense from Sen.Sessions and earlier to that Sen.Sensenbrener . These kind of people come and go, but how much they can achieve? Do they really know the implications of what they talk? my sincere guess is 'nothing', other than just want to be in the news

Would you please elaborate on "substantially different". If the job title is different and job duties are very different, would that qualify as "substantially different". I have been thinking about doing the same.

If the first labor is done through PERM, can the 2nd labor be filed? I had heard that there is a policy of one PERM per company per employee. Does that not apply if the new job with the same company is substantially different.

Would you please give me as much info as you can cause I am seriously thinking about this option.

Thanks in advance.

You can only file a second LC for the same employee at the same company, if the new position is "substantially different" from the old position. [ I am happy to report, that I just received my PERM approval for doing exactly this :) ]

If your LC was filed via PERM and approved, you do not need to refile just because you lost the receipt. If you're filing an H1-B renewal, a screen shot / printout of the PERM app, showing the case #, is sufficient. If you're filing an I-140, there's a check box on the I-140 to indicate that USCIS should request a PERM approval receipt directly from DoL.

- gs

tejonidhi

11-27 01:24 PM

Rajen, Thanks for your advice. He does not want to come to US for job as he left US for good.the consulting firm told him that they have applied for his substitution and brought him back here. So I am a little concerned to know if there is any other way of Labor substitution. Consulting company lawyer says they filed it prior to July 15. Thank you

Better_Days

12-21 01:45 AM

I just read at TOI that Dr Manmohan Singh's daughter Amrit Singh is a staff attorney at ACLU.